Pug, Jimmy, Or? on Golden State School of Theology

==

Pug

The thing isn't working. I just emailed you.

 

I guess I am partially responsible for this thread turning more personal. I should have kept my feelings and doubts about Jimmy to myself. Sorry.

 

===



I think it important that we realize that if someone once, twice, or even three times "errs", that doesn't mean that everything done by a person must be wrong! If a person opts to respond when he feels he is attacked, then perhaps just an explanation that actually is consistent with the evidence is all that is needed. Counter attack is not needed.


In this thread I don't see how I've attacked anyone. Jimmy and Dennis take umbrage because I mention Jimmy to Graves in an attempt to understand a GSST regulation. Where is the problem in that? If everything is on the up and up and out in the open, then why get bent out of shape? Why the counter attacks elsewhere?

If one is not required to adhere to the GSST Creed in order to graduate or if Jimmy had an exemption from that, then what is the problem with my inquiry? I'm just trying to understand it, not condemn it. I've already said that GSST and Jimmy have their rights. The problem is that what one said was right, the other said was not right!

No one needs to get bent out of shape here. It is GSST which has the creed and the catalogue regs about adhering to it , it is Jimmy who says that he denies an article of the GSST creed , and it is Jimmy who posts himself as a grad of GSST. From these data already on the table, I raised an issue. Perhaps all is well, I don't know! All I would like is an explanation that is consistent with the evidence since this thread is about the programs of GSST. If no explanation is forthcoming, I'll live with that. Then, let's move on.

No where in this thread do I call names or impugn character. No where do I say that Jimmy lied. No where do I say that Jimmy definitely deceived GSST. I say, " I don't know!" I say, maybe there was a misunderstanding. I say Jimmy does "good works."

For crying out loud, even when I excuse and praise Jimmy, some feel he must be defended. Everyone gets bent out of shape!

Well, I'll try not to when I am attacked. For example, in a thread posted on online college my two unaccredited degrees from Linda Vista are referenced. Because of these it is said that I shouldn't criticize any UA programs. Yes that's true . I attended UA schools.

Before that, in 1957 I dropped out of high school too. HS was too hard for me. (There, now whoever may wish to can criticize that on online college too. "Just look at Bill, cannot even graduate from HS. What a hypocrite!" ). Perhaps that's part of the reason I chose to, for the last 35 years , teach learning disabled secondary students who struggle.

The year of my religious conversion I entered in 1959 a nonaccredited Bible College (Southwestern BC -if any wishes to criticize that too, there is more fuel for the flaming, have fun) which my church had started. The learning remained difficult, but I had more motivation now. This school went under. Then I transferred to Linda Vista which now is Southern Cal and is TRACS. Since then I've graduated from four accredited schools. I opted for the UZ doc as it is cheap, all DL, allows me to research my topic of interest, and is GAAP.

But my point is, I'm not going to get bent out of shape because someone says I went to an unaccredited school. Go right ahead and harp on that "flaw." I'm not going to start calling those posters names because they say that. In fact that is true, I did. So what?

If someone deduces from my early ed experiences and implies on that forum that I am not qualified to now forty years later comment on any UA school because I once went to one (or two) , oh well, go ahead, I don't care. Here's more fuel: I may choose sometime to help out an UA school. Have more fun with that and be blessed.

I don't need to get bent out of shape and call names or have friends run to my rescue. I think I'm doing just fine!


BTW, despite the rumor, I am not Janko's clone ; I am much better looking

 

Bill, you emailed me?

Bill,

You sent me an email? I have nothing in my mailbox.

Pug

 

The GSST exemption granted to Jimmy was pretty informal along the lines of "if you think you will get something out of it enroll." I don't think that one cracked any foundations.

 

Bill: That is most certainly true.

 

I do not see GSST erasing evidence under the guise of repentance, a practice that leads (designedly) to an "x's word against y's" situation. Nor do I see Dr Graves or other GSST reps using posters-by-proxy. This is all to GSST's good, and facilitates discussion. A recognition of these things will enable posters of good will in this discussion of GSST to clear away some of the static, and to avoid making someone or something other than GSST the focus of attention here.

Some time back, on another thread, I asked a question that brought umbrage, though not from the nature of the question nor from anybody at GSST! I will re-ask it:

Since apparently some GSST faculty have been using ACCS as a school to "upgrade" their credentials, what will they do now that ACCS has lost its TRACS accreditation?

 

Going off topic for a second, please be patient...

Alan,

I need see that you graduated from Briercrest with a BA. I'd like to talk to you about what you did to satisfy the 4 hours of Field Education and 3 hour Internship. I could use some ideas.

Pug

 

<<I need see that you graduated from Briercrest with a BA. >>

I need see????? I'm sure that Briercrest must be very proud....


Pug

 

Real nice site.... Anyone who takes a stand verses degree mills is tarred and feathered.

 

Which part? About him being better looking? lol

 

My experience with GSST was good. I could positively compare my experience there (earning the M.Div.) with my work toward earning a M.A. in New Testament from a RA school (www.jbc.edu). It is hard to make an exact comparison as the methodologies were different.

As far as workload goes (number of papers, expected number of pages, etc....) GSST required much more than the RA school. As far as testing goes, the RA school was more difficult as they required proctored tests while GSST required no testing at all, if my memory serves me correctly. I also took no language courses at GSST so I cannot compare those. Since I already had both Greek and Hebrew in my undergrad program neither Johnson or GSST required me to take them again.

One thing that is really difficult to judge is the level of expectancy from the school. I worked as hard on courses for GSST as I did for the RA school. Would GSST have accepted less? I don't know, as I never tried to shortchange the process. As I believe Walden says in his book, you can get a good education from a substandard school if you (the student) still put in the work, whether necessary or not. (BTW, I'm not saying that GSST is substandard.)

My main purpose in going through GSST was that ACCS would not let me into the D.Min. program without the M.Div., but they would accept GSST's M.Div. which was the much less expensive route to take. In other words, I could have went with an RA and/or ATS accredited M.Div., but being the pragmatist that I am, I decided to save the money, since my ultimate goal was the D.Min.

BLD

 

Re: Bill, you emailed me?

===

I used your PM email yesterday. Then I sent a DI PM today.

 

===

We need to define "upgrade." IMO it is unlikely that in the eyes of Christian academe, eg TRACS, the D. Min from ACCS even had ACCS retained accreditation, would be deemed a suitable qualification to teach grad Bible/Theology. It would be an additional qualification to to instruct in ministry at any level . But, I myself could not muster a good argument that successful pastors with years of experience cannot well instruct in grad Ministry or even in undergrad Bib/Theo without accredited docs. That is, IMO, they can!

BTW, I have reason to think that some GSST faculty are in fact recognised by large denominations and TRACS schools as qualified to instruct adults.

But generally 1/2 of an MDiv degree , as the GSST program, is not in practics but in academics as Bible, Theology, and languages (grammar, exegetics). Therefore, what may be needed is not a whole bunch more DMins, but some accredited ThMs, PhDs, ThDs to do these academics.

These good men of GSST are giving their time! They likely cannot afford the cost or residencies of RA or some UK Theology docs at $20,000+. They might look toward South Africa and do an interesting research GAAP doc for under $3000.

These are just my opinions ; the faculty should be guided, of course, by what they think God wants.

,

 

Bill,
I think the biggest problem might lie with those that never attended an accredited school and began with an unaccredited one. They would not know what should be expected of them, having never experienced it. Someone like me -- having two accredited Bachelor's (AABC), and one accredited Master's (RA) -- already knew what should be expected at that level, so that is the level I worked at even in an unaccredited setting. If I had not had that previous experience I most certainly would have turned in substandard work. Whether that work would have been accepted at GSST or not, I could not tell you. I tend to think that it would not, but could not state so one way or the other definitely. I can tell you that many remarks were made on my papers (some positive, some negative), which convinced me that the work was being evaluated. I had Paul Graves as my mentor throughout the program and he seemed to be well-versed in the subjects I was writing on.

I completely agree with you that someone grading another's work should be an expert in that particular field. Having an accredited Ph.D./Th.D. gives assurance (or at least should) that that person has the expertise necessary. But at the same time, there are those who have the expertise necessary who do not hold those degrees. The problem is that there is no way for us to verify that expertise. The degree offers an assurance not available otherwise.

On a somewhat related note: My undergraduate alma mater (www.occ.edu) prefers that their professors hold a D.Min. rather than a Ph.D./Th.D. because it has a much broader application to ministry, and they are in the business of training ministers. If they were strictly training academics, especially at the graduate level, I'm sure they would insist on the Ph.D./Th.D.

BLD

 

I am a current student at GSST having one course and my thesis to complete a MMIN in Bible History. I do have a RA undergrad in Ministry from Tabor College in Kansas.

I agree that the amount of work GSST requires is substantial. I find only about 20-25% of the basic coursework to be challenging, the balance is somewhat informational and seems to be included just to ensure the textbooks are throughly read.

The writing assignments are also substantial. Most of my courses required answering hundreds of questions, several 3-7 page assignments (i.e. summarize the chapter you just read, state what you believe to be the three major points, justify your answer using external sources).

There are no tests, but each course requires a "final" in the form of 20 page paper covering an approved topic.

My complaints justify some of Bill's concerns. While every assignment and paper is graded and comments are given; there is very little critical analysis and constructive feedback. I pride myself in doing quality work and hopefully would never submit substandard work, but I am sure I have produced conclusions, inferences, and correlations that need to be challenged.

Sometimes (and I have no evidence for this), I get the feeling my papers are not thouroughly examined. I feel certain they are read and evaluated, but I think feedback is lacking.

One other concern. I have been looking at a number of RA graduate (NOT post-grad) programs. I have been unable to locate even one that would accept any transfer credit from GSST, let alone recognize the degree. While the work is substantial and I am learning, I have the feeling there will be very little utility in the degree if I decide to continue my education.

The mentors I have worked with at GSST all seem to be genuine men of God, working hard to provide options. They have always -- and I mean always -- been quick to respond to questions, understanding with conflicts, providing guidance when asked, and very helpful with selecting writing topics.

I chose GSST because of the cost, 100% DL, and it was the only graduate program (with any substance) that had a history track. If someone knows of other options, I would be greatly interested.

Hope this helps,
In Christ,
Mike

 

Mike

Thanks for your info. If the Tabor BA is accredited, I see no reason why you could not enter an accredited MDiv on the strength of that. Make the deal that if you finish a year in the new school successfully that they will then transfer in the GSST stuff. I really think that you could find a school that would allow that. If you cannot, please let me know.

 

Absolutely Bill, my undergrad degree is sufficient to enroll in all the MDiv programs I inquired about, I was just hoping I would not have to repeat all 45 hours I will have completed.

When I started GSST about 2 years ago, my only objective was self-study. It was only recently that I decided I might want to continue my education and have a desire to perhaps teach more formally in the future.

ADVICE I SHOULD HAVE LISTENED TO: "Plans, goals, and objectives change, consider that BEFORE you choose UA."

I like your suggestion, I will certainly make those inquiries.

Thanks,
In Christ,
Mike